Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded✔ FIXED

Although I do not have any specific experience with the Durace and cycle dynamic combination, I do have some experience with cycle dynamic cogs and in making narrow chains. The following will be some of my observations to help you find a solution to the problem.
First of all, are both your shifters and rear derailer 8 or 9 speed? They should both be the same. How about your chain? Is it worn? Check to make sure that there aren't any burrs on the cogs, that has been a problem for them in the past. Are your 8 speed cogs road or mtb, the road ones have two shifter ramps machined in and the mountain have three. I don't think it will make much of a difference except if you mix and match road and mtb cogs. Once you know that these things are all okay then it comes down to cog spacing. Common logic would dictate if you have 8 clicks at the lever then you have 8 movements at the rear end, but if the spaces are not almost dead on to Shimano's design you will have the problems that sound like what your shop is talking about. So, your next would be to compare your cogs to a standard Durace set-up. Are the spacers the same width in every spot? Next are the combination of the cog widths and spacers exactly the same in every spot? Once you have your spaces dead on so that 8 cogs and 7 spacers in between add up to exactly X number of thousands of an inch give or take a couple, I can't see why there would be a problem. (unless there is some damage or extreme wear to your shifter or rear derailer). As to the allegations that a 9 speed chain would be slower it wouldn't be on the outside because a narrower chain sliding sideways on the teeth will never rub any adjacent cogs. It could only be if they fit tight on the teeth. So, take a 9 speed chain that you want to use and see how the narrow links fit on the chain ring teeth, do they fit tighter or slide on and off easier? The same goes for the rear cogs. I know or a fact that the cycle dynamic cogs are not exactly the same thickness through the whole block, they vary by over ten thou, and that's where the combination of cog thickness and spacer width comes in as I was talking about before. There might be some cogs that are too tight for a 9 speed chain. If your are set on this combination you'll have to machine or grind these cogs, once your chain fits then it comes down to spacing again, exactly duplicating the Durace set-up. So you might have to make some custom spacers. Even though a 9 speed chain is narrower, as long as it has lateral flexibility (evenly spaced) and no stiff links and slides on and off the teeth I can see no reason why it should be slower shifting.

You say that your D/A equipment is new, but from the late eighties. Are your shifters and the rear derr. from or close to the same year? Maybe there might be a mismatch. But if they are that dated there definetely could be a difference in the spacing of the cyc. dynam. from the shimano original. What really concerns me is that you have a rear dropout spacing of 126 mm. and you have a 135 mm hub stuck in it. This wouldn't throw off your shifting as long as the derr. could reach far enough inboard from the starting point to get on the 8 th. cog. Did you have to spread the dropouts to get the hub in? Have you measured the drop out inside measurement and the hub over locknut dimension? 9 mm. is quite a spread. I can't see how the dropouts could be parallel with the skewer tight without stressing the frame or the hub bearings/ axel. In answer to the questions about the 2.5 lb. frame and the chain rings, I can't give an answer on either. I have some questions for you. You say that your Klein was at 15.5 lbs with a 4 lb. frame and a steel fork that probably weighed up to 1.5 lbs. with handle bar shift/braking. That doesn't add up in my mind. In 1986 I built a road bike that weighed 14 3/4 lbs. It had a 3 lb carbon/ alum. frame, a 1.1 lb. alum. fork and the lightest brakes/ derr's/ pedals/ h.s. that you could get and involved a lot of custom maching. The wheels had 300 gr. rims, al. nipples, 15/ 16 ga. spokes, 32/ wheel, alum. freewheel and fairly light tubs. I'd be interested in hearing how you got it to 15.5 lbs. Walter.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum